36 Responses to “E!’s The Soup Just Got a Whole Lot Squatchier”

Craig: why are you persisting the use of the word “squatch” when so many of us in here detest, despise and dislike the use of it? It’s not cute, it’s not funny, it’s offensive to women and it lowers the credibility of this site. Please, stop.

I’ll be honest, when I hear the term squatch I do think of hirsute females (mostly from the 70’s before waxing was in style) which does add to the giggle factor when I hear “it looks squatchy” or “I do believe there is a squatch in these woods” as I immediately think of a nudist colony or something equally ridiculous. People wonder why I laugh at these commercials, this is why.

However I am not offended by the use of this word as the meanings of words change constantly. A geek used to be a sideshow act that bit the heads off of living chickens, now they are the backbone of IT Departments and Maker Sheds everywhere. Hipsters used to be a style of trousers, not a lifestyle. Best to do is take it in the context it was meant and both sides step away from having hissy fits, please. Any language that is still spoken is constantly evolving; new terms being added, some taken away, many more being modified to the point of being unrecognizable from their original forms.

Craig: Using the “if you don’t like it, don’t read it” defense is doing yourself, this site and this area of interest a gross disservice. When you use that word, you’re equating this site with the show and it’s participants, both of who are now openly ridiculed by crypto insiders as well as casual observers. Why in the name of God you would willingly utilize stupid hipster terminology associated with a joke of a television program is beyond me. I’m willing to bet that Jeff Meldrum doesn’t use that word. Hell, I’ll even go so far as to posit a guess that Tom Biscardi doesn’t even use it. I get that this is your site and hence your rules, but you’re dragging it down to reality show circus levels every time you use that word in print. Also, the fact that you chose to get all aggro in defense of your insistence to tie this site to the FB failure instead of engaging in a more tacit defense of why you think it’s okay and funny and cool to continue using the word leaves me puzzled. There may be 25,000 subscribers, but the number of members who actually post in here is easily in the double digits only. And personally, I’ve read more criticisms of the word in here than posts supporting it. Just sayin’.

Sharon: I was familiar with the word in it’s more offensive context before it was co-opted by Moneymaker and his clique. There is no rational, sensible argument that can be made that will ever satisfactorily explain would they continue to use the term due to it’s alternate definition. Early reviews of the show from the first season even went so far as to point out how embarrassingly self-conscious the repeated use of the word was on the program. The unfortunate truth is that the word does indeed reference a woman’s vagina, no matter how enthusiastically a self-professed Bigfoot expert tries to re-purpose that word to create a clever, marketable trademarked term.

Graybear: go to urbandictionary.com and run a search on the word. I won’t reprint it here because the last time I did my post got deleted and I’d prefer to keep this discussion open so others may join.

I hate the term, and I’ve talked to others (online and off) who share the same opinion and are baffled to see its use perpetuated on sites and forums that should know better. It cheapens this field of study when FB uses it, and it makes me die a little inside when I see it used on this site. One of the reasons I came to become a regular here is because there’s a certain standard at work in this webspace that sets it above the many other cryptosites that litter the online wasteland. There’s nothing wrong with having some fun and keeping things light, but using that stupid word brings this site a little too close to the abyss.

I am with Gridbug on this. The community of actual researchers who take the field seriously probably do take issue with using the word “Squatch” and the portrayal of researchers who use a word like that on TV to a mass audience, most of who already think that anyone interested in “Bigfoot” probably has a mental problem, is disheartening. Is it wrong to want this field of research taken seriously? Just because a word is commonly used and others don’t vocalize their complaints about it doesn’t mean it’s fine. I’ve spent a great many years researching and investigating cryptozoological theories, folklore and other related phenomena and am always surprised at the lack of seriousness the people who are, or say they are, serious about research take themselves.
Oh, it’s fine, that’s how we talk.
Oh, it’s not bothersome to anyone.
How we speak to each other, and in close quarters, is vastly different then how we should be presenting ourselves to the public at large. At least if we want to be taken as seriously as most claim they want to be. The fact that the word “squatch” doesn’t bother some people only bothers me slightly. The fact that people who seem passionate about cryptozoology and yet allow people like Moneymaker to be the face of community via the show on Animal Planet is far more disturbing.
We should elevate the conversation, not lower it.
Words are important.

1) The line of distinction here is that “squatch” is only recently being forced into the mainstream lexicon via a terrible, terrible show that is in and of itself taking a dump all over this field of interest. ‘Chupacabra’ and ‘Loch Ness Monster’ are the ORIGINAL titles for the creatures, not cutesy shorthand versions of the actual title. There are derogatory definitions for ‘Sasquatch’ as well, but the reason they don’t gain traction is because the word ‘Sasquatch’ predates the ‘funny’ alternate definitions. Do you honestly not see this?

2) As LarryPeura stated, it is indeed hard enough to gain mainstream credibility as it is, but to utilize Moneymaker’s pet term for Sasquatch is just stupid and works against us. Even if it DIDN’T have a alternate definition, it’s still the word that FB has gone to great lengths to establish as “thee” insider term for these creatures. If you want to continue to associate Cryptomundo with Finding Bigfoot, you have every right to do so. Just please take into consideration that while there are plenty of people who find no problem with that word, that does NOT elevate it to the standards that we rely on to be taken seriously.

Do what you want here, but keep in mind that you represent a wide variety of interests and beliefs. The less you do to damage our overall standing in the world’s eye, the better off we all are.

Okay, I get the picture. I guess I’ve just demonstrated where I haven’t been in the past few years. Somehow I don’t feel impoverished.
This whole thing reminds me of a time back in the late 70s when my wife was active in the American Indian Movement. There was a very vocal minority which decried the use of the word ‘squaw’. The word has been around for many many years and was always taken to simply mean a female Native American. But there was a small tribe in rural Canada in whose vernacular the word meant, well, squatch, and they apparently had nothing better to do over the winter than to write letters and opinions (this was before the world wide web). This went on for a couple of years with the letters pro and con becoming more and more pointed and hysterical. Then, after a while something new came along to outrage the letter writers and squaw went back to meaning a female Native American when it was used, which was much less often than before. I rather imagine that this will do much the same. Finding Bigfoot cannot last much longer (not without actually finding something, anyway) and with Bobo, Moneymaker and company no longer waving the word around every week it will most likely fade into the woods. The very best way to handle a situation like this one is to ignore the word and eventually it’ll go away. That probably doesn’t quell your current sense of outrage and embarrassment and I do understand that, but you need to pick your fights; you can’t win this one, not while Moneymaker et al are on television waving the word around. Just grit your teeth and wait for the inevitable cancellation. Really, if you didn’t know the definition of the word, as I did not, it’s just another word. Why are you letting someone else’s definition of a word that most resembles the name of a food plant (squash) get you so hot and bothered?

As an Ausssie I always have a quiet giggle to myself when I hear North Americans using the word “fanny” to describe a backside (sorry, a “butt”) – it means something quite different (try “squatch”) here and in the UK. Just sayin’…

Graybear: excellent points, though I do take slight exception of your closing statement… if it offends even a small percentage, does that excuse it’s continued usage? Not where I stand. It’s pretty obvious that whatever sort of promise FB had in its inception, it’s become cryptozoology’s number one enemy at this stage, and we’d all be best served to steer clear of it as it heads into its inevitable death spiral. To me, this includes using the word “squatch” since it’s become synonymous with Matt Moneymaker and his TV comedy hour. Simply put, it’s not doing us any favors. Add that to the double meaning of the word, and it just makes good sense to avoid using it it altogether, lest we be considered of the same mindset that use the word on a daily basis. Despite whatever Craig may think, I’m not on some crusade to strike the word from the English language. I just think it’s ignorant to use a word that has such a loaded double-entendre in mixed company, as well as providing the perception that we’re all on the same page as Moneymaker by employing his silly terminology. I choose to stand apart from that mess. I’m not better nor worse than my peers and contemporaries, but I do strive to make a positive difference in this field and to demonstrate the intelligence and good sense that most of us employ as we pursue this mystery. Really, that’s as simple as it gets.

Count me as one who finds the term ‘squatch’ or any variant vomit inducing. You already embrace all that is FB, now you embrace their silly slang. ‘Squatch’ merely conjures images of an embarrassingly awful program.

As a woman, I’m not offended by term “Squach” (though now that I know about it, I shall giggle my head off every time I hear it). In the context it is using in bigfooting, it just beens Bigfoot, or bigfooting. Many folks in the field use the term with regularity and are not saying it to be offensive. It’s the intent behind the word that matters, not the word itself. Now, if Matt and company called Renae the word in its “urban slang” sense, I would be offended. But they haven’t.

It’s all about context. The word in general isn’t a horrible word. In fact the word “Bitch” is far more insulting. Yet, it is commonly used by dog breeders to define a female dog. I think it makes most folks twitch, but it means something entirely different in the canine world. And to be honest, there are many words, as Craig pointed out, that change meanings, depending on the context they are being used.

The word beaver mean’s “vagina” in 70’s trucker slang, and the word bugger was used to describe anal copulation, now they use it to sell Toyota trucks (though to some “old school” folks it does offend). It has gone from a sexual meaning to an expletive equal to the word “damn”.

Words CHANGE their meanings soften over time, and they become less harsh. They also can completely, change definition over time. My father to this day will not let anyone say the word “Jezzz” or “Jeapers” because in the 30s when he was a kid it meant taking the “Lord’s Name in Vain”. I avoid saying it around him, but I also feel it is necessary to roll with the times and accept the fact that some things don’t mean the same to other people as they do to me.

Getting up and arms over words can be just as offensive in the end. Especially when folks don’t mean it to be the more “negative” meaning. You’re basically accusing them of using the negative meaning, when in the end they’re likely not to know what the negative meaning is….

(I had to re-edit my comment, because my spell checker changed some of my sentences)

As a woman, I’m not offended by term “Squach” (though now that I know about it, I shall giggle my head off every time I hear it). In the context it is used in bigfooting, it just means Bigfoot, or bigfooting. Many folks in the field use the term with regularity and are not saying it to be offensive. It’s the intent behind the word that matters, not the word itself. Now, if Matt and company called Renae the word in its “urban slang” sense, I would be offended. But they haven’t.

It’s all about context. The word in general isn’t a horrible word. In fact the word “Bitch” is far more insulting. Yet, it is commonly used by dog breeders to define a female dog. I think it makes most folks twitch, but it means something entirely different in the canine world. And to be honest, there are many words, as Craig pointed out, that change meanings, depending on the context they are being used.

The word beaver mean’s “vagina” in 70’s trucker slang, and the word bugger was used to describe anal copulation, now they use it to sell Toyota trucks (though to some “old school” folks it does offend). It has gone from a sexual meaning to an expletive equal to the word “damn”.

Words CHANGE their meanings, soften over time, and they become less harsh. They also can completely, change definition over time. My father to this day will not let anyone say the word “Jezzz” or “Jeapers” because in the 30s when he was a kid it meant taking the “Lord’s Name in Vain”. I avoid saying it around him, but I also feel it is necessary to roll with the times and accept the fact that some things don’t mean the same to other people as they do to me.

Getting up and arms over words can be just as offensive in the end. Especially when folks don’t mean it to be the more “negative” meaning. You’re basically accusing them of using the negative meaning, when in the end they’re likely not to know what the negative meaning is….

But I can think it’s stupid, and I do. It implies a familiarity with the animal that this show is clearly showing these people do not have. But no skin off mine.

So, stupid term, stupid show, crypto site, stuff happens. I mean, Life Would Be a Slow News Day if nothing went up on Cryptomundo until the sasquatch was confirmed by science. This site covers wheat and chaff, and is fun. I think enough of us serious about the topic are here to call ’em as we see ’em, educate the uneducated, and help the community at large surf the inevitable BS.

I think that the show disrespects the subject matter so badly that it almost doesn’t matter what they call the animal.

Wow People. It’s just a term the FB guys use to be cute when referring to a sasquatch. I don’t like it just because it’s annoying, but it’s not offensive in any way. I don’t know that many people who are so uptight that the word “squatch” bothers them. Get out, get a life and quit being so angry at everything. Loosen up…..I guarantee you’ll live longer.

I am sorry but this is getting ridiculous. This discussion is taking the focus off what this blog is really about and it extremely offends me that you would even start a self righteous rant about why Craig should not use the term Squatch on his own blog about Sasquatch! Get your mind out of the gutter and leave this blog alone if you are not adult enough to handle words with more than one meaning.

Ok, here we have grown people arguing about one stupid word coined by one of crappiest TV shows of all time. The word in question is offensive to me only in one way; it was made up by some TV dudes to sound catchy and stylish. Well apparently it worked. I do not watch the show for many reasons; the use of the word “Squatch” far too often is one of the reasons. Apparently there are a bunch of people out there that do like the show for whatever reason. That is their choice. My choice is not to watch it because in my opinion it is a waste of time and Advil, which will be required for the head ache I would get if I did watch it. A lot like the head ache I got reading this back and forth nonsense about a word made up by some clowns pretending to be something they are not. It is starting to become a bit embracing for me post here recently so perhaps I should stop contributing my comments. You guys can continue the great squatch debate. What a freaking bunch of Bleeps!!!

WOW…I guess that means my name is offensive then to, huh? I didn’t know squatch meant that….waaaayyyy before my time I guess. This is why I hardly ever put my two cents in, other people who are “regulars” thinking they know whats best for everybody else. Its funny to me that the so many people find it sooo hard to NOT complain about a program that they HATE. I watch the program and I laugh my a@! off. Do people really think a program on national television is actually going to find bigfoot? Lighten up people…it’s just a word.

I wasn’t going to comment on this, but, after reading the comments, I can’t resist.

I think Craig is right. It seems to be common in our language for long words to be shortened to a more manageable size. I see noting wrong with “squatch”. It is certainly less of a mouthful than “Sasquatch” or “Bigfoot”.

It is too bad if Political Correctness worms its way into Cryptozoology. If we are to refrain from speaking (not only in opinions, but in the very terms used) how can we be free to say anything that might possible cause someone to take offense? As we see here, it does not take much to set some people off.

As far as the word “squatch” goes, I never heard it used to describe a uniquely female body part. But I can find some humor in that application. If this is offensive to anyone, I think they need to lighten up.

I think Finding Bigfoot is a good thing for cryptozoology. Although it is hardly a serious scientific undertaking, it exposes our endeavor to the public in a way people can relate to. It is both entertaining and educational. I look forward to seeing new episodes, even though I know they are not going to find anything conclusive.

This is quite ridiculous! I have referred to “Squatching” for at least 7 years! Waaaaay before Finding Bigfoot! Check your facts! Obviously you are not one who actually participates in outdoor Squatching! We use it as a verb, like running, hiking, SQUATCHING!

jamieb got it right! “I am sorry but this is getting ridiculous. This discussion is taking the focus off what this blog is really about and it extremely offends me that you would even start a self righteous rant about why Craig should not use the term Squatch on his own blog about Sasquatch! Get your mind out of the gutter and leave this blog alone if you are not adult enough to handle words with more than one meaning.”

Wow! A lot of emotion stirred by the use of a word. Craig used the word “Squatchier” in the title of his post. I believe he used this form of the word “Squatch” to refer to the FB show.

My view on it is that it is not a problem. Oh, yes, I do not like the use of the word. Yes, I find it ridiculous that the FB crew over-use the word intentionally. It is annoying. I do agree with gridbug, it is really annoying. However, I find it perfectly acceptable that Craig used the word in his title. In fact, I believe Craig did it for it’s humor value, almost calling attention to how ridiculously the word is used in the FB episodes. Craig almost did this “tongue in cheek”. I think that’s what writers are supposed to do at sites like this, post something and draw some attention to it while entertaining the readers. Craig did just that. No harm, no foul! Hey, you read Craig’s post here, did we not all? The title did what it was intended to do, it got my attention while making me think of humorous FB show. Mission accomplished!

So gridbug, although I despise the word almost as much as you do, I do not think Craig was out of line in using it in this particular title. Maybe if Craig was doing a serious post on BF and Sasquatches, I might agree with you gridbug, that maybe using a form of the word “Squatch” would not be appropriate. But the context in using the word was appropriate this time.

Will I use the word? No, not in a serious conversation about Sasquatch topics. Would I use it for entertainment value to draw attention to the ridiculous antics of the show FB? YES! And that is all Craig did.

I know what you mean gridbug, hearing that word anytime does make me cringe a bit. It is annoying. So I do not use the word. If you feel that way, do not use any form of the word either, and hopefully the use of the word will die off. But to get so emotional because you despise the word so much, is taking it out of context a bit. You kind of attacked Craig and the site because you feel so strongly about it. I think your argument holds merit, but to kill the messenger for delivering a simple message that uses a word you feel so strongly about, is a bit over the top.

I definitely think you should reconsider your position here and give Craig a free pass and maybe an apology for a slight over-reaction on your part. Again, I feel your pain gridbug. I agree with some of your points. Where we differ and part ways is when you blame Craig for weakening the Cryptomundo site because he used the word “Squatchier” in his title. Think about it! You do not know Craig’s intention for using the word. You are judging him and perhaps you are judging him incorrectly. Afterall, none of us can read another man’s mind or know his intentions.

One last item gridbug: It is Craig’s site. He does make the rules and he can also enforce the rules of the site. But instead of Craig deleting your posts, he let you speak your peace and post. Some editors might not have been so kind. He gave you a pass. I think you should do the same!

Gee, I have one of the dirtiest minds around and it took me this long to find out that ‘squatch’ is somehow a dirty word that I shouldn’t be using. I’m only realizing this today. How is it that I’ve been using this term of endearment, nickname, short cut for years without realizing it was a ‘dirty’ offensive’ word. All this because some 13 year old boy decided was dirty. It’s seems to be the new national pastime…What offends me and how can I impose my will on someone’s freedom of speech, because I’ve decided a word offends me. Poor Tomsquatch and squatchwatcher.

Give me a break. If you don’t like it, don’t use it. If you don’t like the tv show, don’t watch it. This whole thing makes me want to say it even more.

Here is a clue. If you have to look something up on Urban Dictionary the word isn’t in common enough use to be truly offensive.

For Squatch Sake…get a grip. BTW I’m now referring to male genitalia as- 3.14 in honor of Pi day. So good luck finding the circumference of circle without offending everyone.

Folks, I never said I was going to touch off a nuclear war over the use of the word. If Craig and anyone else wants to use it, hallelujah and hooray. I’m not “mad” at Craig for using it, and I don’t bear him any ill will. I just think it’s wise that this site gives FB the same sort of wide berth that it gives Biscardi etc. Personally, I DO think it’s funny (on a juvenile level) that the word “squatch” has an ulterior meaning in reference to “girl parts” but that doesn’t mean I think it’s wise or okay to use it in a public forum that’s read and visited by tons of people, both insiders and non.

In a nutshell (and I hope this ends the debate on this level) the word is stupid. It’s repeated use by Moneymaker and his cronies is annoying. I don’t use the word in any fashion purely because it’s so stupid and I personally don’t want to be associated with FB. It sucks to see “squatch” used here, but as I’ve said several times now it’s Craig’s prerogative to use it and that’s perfectly fine. I haven’t lost any sleep over this, and I’m not going to. You like the word and want to look like an idiot by using it? Please squatch to your heart’s content. Done and done.

I’ve been following the Cryptomundo site on and off for about a year now, probably a little more, and religiously everyday for the last month or two. In all honesty the show FB is what sparked my interest in cryptids more recently, which led me to following this site. But honestly I think I might be done with it, Im 18yo and this is the most ridiculous fight in the crypto-community yet. If you think how offensive a word is out of context really affects the validity or respect of your field of research you need a wake up call. This is a field of work where most of the world looks at some of you’re research and says, “Really you went into the Himalaya’s looking for an albino monkey/man hybrid? You sir are a joke.” FB may be hindering in the eyes of the BF community but in all reality it has probably given it more publicity and funding than anything before it has. I was just really upset to see a fight, pretty much about hurt feelings because of a misused word, on what I thought was the most legitamate Cryptozoologic blog on the internet. Sorry this is the reason I made an account and finally posted, but maybe Ill be posting more in the future.